ThrowerOfStones wrote: Now you're resorting to german insults? Do you think that's clever?

Yes.

And why would you want me to convince you of anything? You quite obviously value your own opinion far higher than that of any others.

Only because so far nobody has managed to convince me I should do otherwise. My opinion HAS been changed by better thinkers than I; is it my fault that none of them happen to frequent this board AND disagree with my basic premises?

If I have more time later I might post some examples, right now I honestly don't have the time or inclination, especially with your attitude.

You drive my attitude, boy; you'd find me a lot less aggressive if you were a lot more cooperative, but extracting reasoned debate from you is rather like getting a straight answer out of a politician.

I urge you again to either give the game a second chance or stop harping over it - it can't be good for your blood pressure.

The problem is that Spore has become a coloring book instead of a chemistry set
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -Douglas Adams

Eekwotsthat wrote:Some people did and still expect games as complex as Civ X, Total War, Settlers, Masters of Orion for each phase.

I knew each of Spore's phases would be not be on the same level as a game dedicated to one aspect. But I did expect my decisions on a previous phase to carry over into the next and for my creature's design to actually matter.

Before I quit playing, I was running a creature with no arms, no legs, and no eyes just to make it interesting. But even then, cell and creature were still a cake-walk. I quit before going to tribal because the concept of crippled, blind slugs becoming civilized was laughable.

Quite obviously you aren't the target audience, then, if you expected to get the same - or even more - enjoyment from playing a formless mass, and then decided NOT to play further because a crippled blind slug was laughable - that would have been incentive for me to keep playing, to see just how far I could take my ball of flesh.

ThrowerOfStones wrote:Once your down with your civilization of bat-men, you embark on the mighty civilization of pigmonkeys, and then later the civilization of pant-shaped plants, and so on and so forth.

And each of those civilizations can be played exactly the same, performing the same repeatative tasks.

The gameplay of spore certainly could benefit from more differentiation, but saying that each game is the same is basically missing the whole point, the whole attraction of Spore - the creators.

I look at the creators as the tools that SHOULD have been used to set the capabilities of your creations. Instead we got a rudimentary 3-D art studio with little effect on actual gameplay.

If all I want to do is create, there are plenty of art programs out there...

Times MinionJoe Has Been Banned: 5 Times MinionJoe's Opinion Has Changed: 0

RocketGirl wrote: Only because so far nobody has managed to convince me I should do otherwise. My opinion HAS been changed by better thinkers than I; is it my fault that none of them happen to frequent this board AND disagree with my basic premises?

Never seen it. If someone starts arguing you generally insult them so they leave and claim victory.

RocketGirl wrote: Only because so far nobody has managed to convince me I should do otherwise. My opinion HAS been changed by better thinkers than I; is it my fault that none of them happen to frequent this board AND disagree with my basic premises?

Never seen it. If someone starts arguing you generally insult them so they leave and claim victory.

Riiiiiight.

I NEVER use reasoned argument backed up by evidence or anything; that would be cheating.

/sarcasm /sarcasm /sarcasm

The problem is that Spore has become a coloring book instead of a chemistry set
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -Douglas Adams

ThrowerOfStones wrote: Now you're resorting to german insults? Do you think that's clever?

Yes.

And why would you want me to convince you of anything? You quite obviously value your own opinion far higher than that of any others.

Only because so far nobody has managed to convince me I should do otherwise. My opinion HAS been changed by better thinkers than I; is it my fault that none of them happen to frequent this board AND disagree with my basic premises?

If I have more time later I might post some examples, right now I honestly don't have the time or inclination, especially with your attitude.

You drive my attitude, boy; you'd find me a lot less aggressive if you were a lot more cooperative, but extracting reasoned debate from you is rather like getting a straight answer out of a politician.

I urge you again to either give the game a second chance or stop harping over it - it can't be good for your blood pressure.

Honestly, if I thought doing so would produce any change, I'd be more inclined to be productive. But if I'm a politician, your a brick wall - a brick wall spewing anti-Spore rage ooze.

In any case, however, since I'm already getting hugely distracted, here's a few quick examples of emergent gameplay I've seen -

In the space stage, I bribed a civilization I had uplifted to attack another. They did so. However, this provoked a third diplomatic civilization to attack them in order to keep the peace. It's a minor example, but it shows that empire personality does matter and that the game will react unpredictably to your actions - the definition of emergent gameplay. The only reason I give you this example rather than a better one is because it happened just last night, and thus is fresh in my memory.

In the creature stage, there's a lot of complexity to be had in interactions with rogues, epics, and allies. Giving examples is kind of hard - the interactions usually come down to "attack or befriend", after all, so every example would come down to "x attacked for an interesting reason" or "x stopped attacking for an interesting reason" or "x attacked despite me doing this causing y but I fixed it with z but that produced q." Again, yesterday, I had an ally attack a neutral species resulting in that species not being hostile to me but being afraid of me. I tried to ally with them, with the result that they are friendly to me but scared of me still, and run away. Every previous time this has occured, species have become entirely hostile - probably because I chose to join in. Since I myself never attacked the species, only my ally did, the species acted differently. They are simplistic, but they are there, and there's a lot of variation even with so few variables.

TDOONAN wrote:OK I read all 11 pages and only found one question about what happens to the creatures created using the new parts.

I assume they will be shared which is fine since this is one of the major aspects of the game. And since they are uploaded as PNG files we will be able to see them in the Sporepedia. But if we choose to not purchase the parts pack (At least until we find it in the bargain bin for $10) will we be able to actually see the creatures on our planets? And will they animate properly since we won't have the new animations either.

I don't filter anything out of my game and so far have been really happy with what I have seen walking around. So far I have not been attacked by giant furniture or Mario's. So it will be interesting to see what happens when these new creatures are added to the Sporepedia if you don't have the parts pack installed.

I am looking forward to the Space expac and will probably buy it when it comes out next year. The ability to beam down to the planet will make the game at least a little bit like what I was expecting.

Yes I am wondering too- I will get it for my nieces game but she does not play connected to internet because of her age so she just does her own thing there.
I guess you might get some error message or it just does not work in your game?
Hopefully we find out more soon how it works.

You will not get achievements if you use the cheat console in that game.
To earn achievements you need to start a new game and not use the cheat console.

ThrowerOfStones wrote:Quite obviously you aren't the target audience, then, if you expected to get the same - or even more - enjoyment from playing a formless mass.

I agree that people with a keen interest in science and a desire to test out the principles of evolution are not the target audience of Spore.

I'd agree too - they should probably play SimEarth or SimLife or Creatures.

Seriously, in order to test out the principles of evolution, you'd need to trash the editors and throw in random mutations and some sort of breeding genealogy mechanic. Such certainly could be done, but Spore would be almost completely pointless to play under those circumstances. EDIT: This is not necessarily true - people certainly did enjoy SimEarth and SimLife and Creatures. But they are ultimately focused differently, and are much more science experiments than games - anyone who can play SimLife or Creatures for more than a few hours has a lot more patience with dull and repetitive gameplay than I do. I've never actually played SimEarth, so...

If you really want to emulate that, of course, what you could do is play Spore by placing each part as you find it on your creature, and then whenever you die, remove one randomly selected part.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 10/13/2008 19:49:05

TDOONAN wrote:I don't filter anything out of my game and so far have been really happy with what I have seen walking around. So far I have not been attacked by giant furniture or Mario's. So it will be interesting to see what happens when these new creatures are added to the Sporepedia if you don't have the parts pack installed.

Man, youre lucky. Seems like half the content that shows up in my space stages is stacks of gray shapes for "buildings" and two-eyed bipedal blobs that just managed to crawl out of the primordial ooze yet somehow manage to fly space craft and build galatic empires.

TDOONAN wrote:I don't filter anything out of my game and so far have been really happy with what I have seen walking around. So far I have not been attacked by giant furniture or Mario's. So it will be interesting to see what happens when these new creatures are added to the Sporepedia if you don't have the parts pack installed.

Man, youre lucky. Seems like half the content that shows up in my space stages is stacks of gray shapes for "buildings" and two-eyed bipedal blobs that just managed to crawl out of the primordial ooze yet somehow manage to fly space craft and build galatic empires.

I think the trick is adding lots of buddies and sporecasts. I hear about this problem a lot, but myself get atleast 95% good content.

ThrowerOfStones wrote: Honestly, if I thought doing so would produce any change, I'd be more inclined to be productive. But if I'm a politician, your a brick wall - a brick wall spewing anti-Spore rage ooze.

Bull. I asked you for evidence and I genuinely wanted it; you refused to provide, hence my reaction. I can be convinced, but only by evidence and reasoned argument. Together. You have not brought these weapons to bear, hence why your argument fails.

Now you're trying to cop out: "Oh, it wouldn't have done any good anyway! You can't be convinced!" Again, bullSPORE; to convince me, you just have to be convincing. I even told you what you needed to do to convince me: show me specific examples of emergent gameplay.
...you haven't even managed to convince me that you know what "emergent gameplay" MEANS, much less given examples. Yet somehow you're trying to spin your refusal to back up your case as being MY fault.

Pull the other one.

In any case, however, since I'm already getting hugely distracted, here's a few quick examples of emergent gameplay I've seen -

In the space stage, I bribed a civilization I had uplifted to attack another. They did so. However, this provoked a third diplomatic civilization to attack them in order to keep the peace. It's a minor example, but it shows that empire personality does matter and that the game will react unpredictably to your actions - the definition of emergent gameplay. The only reason I give you this example rather than a better one is because it happened just last night, and thus is fresh in my memory.

A couple of questions, then: How do you know the third empire attacked the other one "to keep the peace"? WHich game functionality informed you of the third civilization's reasons behind their attack? Because unless they were dealing directly with MY empire, most civilizations never felt the need to explain their actions to me, nor am I aware of a menu option that allows me to pose the question, "Why are you, Civilization B, attacking Civilization A?" And don't get me wrong, I'd LOVE an option like that, it would give Spore rather a lot more political depth...but my question stands: how do you know that was the reason?

In the creature stage, there's a lot of complexity to be had in interactions with rogues, epics, and allies. Giving examples is kind of hard - the interactions usually come down to "attack or befriend", after all, so every example would come down to "x attacked for an interesting reason" or "x stopped attacking for an interesting reason" or "x attacked despite me doing this causing y but I fixed it with z but that produced q."

And, once again, I have to ask about your apparently intimate knowledge of the reasoning behind these actions, and how you acquired that knowledge. Because I have yet to find diplomatic controls/options that allow one to even pose the question to another nation, nor the instances where they explain their tactics/decisions to you.

Again, yesterday, I had an ally attack a neutral species resulting in that species not being hostile to me but being afraid of me. I tried to ally with them, with the result that they are friendly to me but scared of me still, and run away. Every previous time this has occured, species have become entirely hostile - probably because I chose to join in. Since I myself never attacked the species, only my ally did, the species acted differently.

But, you see, these kinds of behaviors are supposed to be based not merely on your actions, but on how the creatures were built, what their stats/affiliations are. Your actions had consequences...that's not emergent gameplay, that's gameplay.
EMERGENT gameplay would be if the creatures' behaviors were based on the gestalt formed by their individual traits, not your actions, producing unique behavior. So far, you haven't described anything that any other game wouldn't do, you haven't described the kind of emergent interaction seen in, say, TheSims 2.

They are simplistic, but they are there, and there's a lot of variation even with so few variables.

And the fact that they are simplistic is also the problem, as I've stated before. Even if they're there...not enough. Even if they genuinely do become unique beings, there aren't enough interaction options to genuinely get a sense of it...only I suspect that they DON'T become genuinely unique beings because of how personality derivation is described in the manual: advance a stage, gain a single trait based on the most-often-used behavior, as opposed to the gestalt of behaviors being stored and used to determine a unique personality.

So, once again, I'm left to ask you the question: where is the emergent gameplay in Spore? Your descriptions don't go much beyond what might have happened in, say, Master of Orion 2, which really doesn't have much emergent gameplay at all, despite being eight flavors of fun. THAT game is well over ten years old; if Spore is only barely coming up to that standard, something is wrong.

The problem is that Spore has become a coloring book instead of a chemistry set
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -Douglas Adams